Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Pepper Spray case hearing - 1/23/03
The "Pepper Spray-by-Q-tip" civil rights lawsuit will be back in trial court on Thursday, January 23, 2003, for its first hearing since being
reinstated.
reinstated.
For immediate release
January 21, 2003
HEADWATERS PEPPER SPRAY CASE HEADS FOR JURY TRIAL
NEW LEGAL TEAM INCLUDES LAWYERS FROM JUDI BARI VS. FBI CASE
Contact: Karen Pickett, Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters 510-548-3113
Press Conference and Court Hearing at US Federal Court in San Francisco Jan. 23
The "Pepper Spray-by-Q-tip" civil rights lawsuit will be back in trial court on Thursday, January 23 for its first hearing since being reinstated. The activist suit against law enforcement for excessive use of force was dismissed by the trial judge in 1998 after a jury deadlocked. Since then the plaintiffs have garnered landslide appeals victories from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court, reinstating the case and putting it back on course for another jury trial. The High Court also refused to grant the top officers from Humboldt County Sheriff's Dept. "qualified immunity" protection, thus creating strong case-law that could have bearing on other civil rights cases.
Thursday's court hearing will determine the next step toward trial for the pepper spray case, which gained attention in 1997 when video images of pepper spray being smeared into the eyes of peaceful protesters sparked international outrage. The protesters were staging sit-ins in corporate offices and on lumber company land in defense of the ancient redwoods of Headwaters Forest, located on California's north coast.
A press conference will take place prior to Thursday's hearing, with case plaintiffs and attorneys in attendance, including courtroom dynamo Tony Serra. The press conference will begin at 2:30 p.m. outside the San Francisco US Federal Court building, located at 450 Golden Gate, on the south side. In case of poor weather, the location will be inside the court building upstairs. The 3:30 p.m. court hearing will take place in the Federal Court building on the 17th floor in Judge Vaughn Walker's courtroom # 6.
The press conference will provide a case synopsis and present the new legal team. Pepper spray plaintiffs have teamed up with the trial team who recently won the historic Judi Bari vs. FBI case, which resulted in a $4.4 million victory against the FBI for Constitutional rights violations of Earth First! activists.
Plaintiff and activist Spring Lundberg was 17 when pepper spray was swabbed into her eyes as she was locked to her fellow protesters, sitting in a circle in Pacific Lumber Company's headquarters office. She stated, "Linking Judi Bari's story with our pepper spray case is an important step in telling our movement's history. Government and Big Timber wanted to crush Judi's Redwood Summer organizing in 1990 just as they wanted to punish us for our beliefs with pepper spray in 1997. Protecting the ancient redwoods of northern California has been-and continues to be-a long struggle, and we're honored to see our work mirrored in the struggles of those who have come before."
Lundberg added, "As US-instigated war in Iraq and around the world rages unabated behind the smokescreen of the 'War on Terror,' it doesn't take much to get called a terrorist these days. We feel our civil rights lawsuit is ever more important in today's post-911 climate of state repression."
###
January 21, 2003
HEADWATERS PEPPER SPRAY CASE HEADS FOR JURY TRIAL
NEW LEGAL TEAM INCLUDES LAWYERS FROM JUDI BARI VS. FBI CASE
Contact: Karen Pickett, Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters 510-548-3113
Press Conference and Court Hearing at US Federal Court in San Francisco Jan. 23
The "Pepper Spray-by-Q-tip" civil rights lawsuit will be back in trial court on Thursday, January 23 for its first hearing since being reinstated. The activist suit against law enforcement for excessive use of force was dismissed by the trial judge in 1998 after a jury deadlocked. Since then the plaintiffs have garnered landslide appeals victories from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court, reinstating the case and putting it back on course for another jury trial. The High Court also refused to grant the top officers from Humboldt County Sheriff's Dept. "qualified immunity" protection, thus creating strong case-law that could have bearing on other civil rights cases.
Thursday's court hearing will determine the next step toward trial for the pepper spray case, which gained attention in 1997 when video images of pepper spray being smeared into the eyes of peaceful protesters sparked international outrage. The protesters were staging sit-ins in corporate offices and on lumber company land in defense of the ancient redwoods of Headwaters Forest, located on California's north coast.
A press conference will take place prior to Thursday's hearing, with case plaintiffs and attorneys in attendance, including courtroom dynamo Tony Serra. The press conference will begin at 2:30 p.m. outside the San Francisco US Federal Court building, located at 450 Golden Gate, on the south side. In case of poor weather, the location will be inside the court building upstairs. The 3:30 p.m. court hearing will take place in the Federal Court building on the 17th floor in Judge Vaughn Walker's courtroom # 6.
The press conference will provide a case synopsis and present the new legal team. Pepper spray plaintiffs have teamed up with the trial team who recently won the historic Judi Bari vs. FBI case, which resulted in a $4.4 million victory against the FBI for Constitutional rights violations of Earth First! activists.
Plaintiff and activist Spring Lundberg was 17 when pepper spray was swabbed into her eyes as she was locked to her fellow protesters, sitting in a circle in Pacific Lumber Company's headquarters office. She stated, "Linking Judi Bari's story with our pepper spray case is an important step in telling our movement's history. Government and Big Timber wanted to crush Judi's Redwood Summer organizing in 1990 just as they wanted to punish us for our beliefs with pepper spray in 1997. Protecting the ancient redwoods of northern California has been-and continues to be-a long struggle, and we're honored to see our work mirrored in the struggles of those who have come before."
Lundberg added, "As US-instigated war in Iraq and around the world rages unabated behind the smokescreen of the 'War on Terror,' it doesn't take much to get called a terrorist these days. We feel our civil rights lawsuit is ever more important in today's post-911 climate of state repression."
###
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Oh I get it. When Saddam kills TENS OF THOUSANDS, you turn away. When Osama bin Laden kills THOUSANDS more, you don't notice. But, when a trespasser is forcibly removed, it's worthy of your time.
When the plane hits your building, remember the people who tried to stop it.
When the plane hits your building, remember the people who tried to stop it.
There's a big difference between being "forcibly removed" and torture. The fact that other atrocities have occurred in the world since this inhumane act of torture was perpetrated makes it no less heinous of a crime.
If Saddam, or Bin laden, were to place pepper-spray on a Q-tip and swab into a teenage-girls eyes, would you say that it's o.k.? Then why is it o.k. for a peace officer in Humbolt co. Ca, to do just that. If the cops get away with this, than I think I will have more to worry about than planes flying into my building!
Torture? Please!
Trespassing? Definitely.
Deserved? Probably.
A weak excuse to beat a somewhat conservative Republican Administration and Law Enforcement Agency over the head with wrongheaded left-wing anarchist, anti-government, anti-establishment lawsuits? No question.
According to you anarchists, the lumber company should pay dearly for their "wrongdoing", and the law enforcement agencies should pay dearly for your "wrongdoing". You somehow have the right to simply take control of someone else's private property, but neither the owner nor law enforcement agencies have the right to force you to leave when you refuse?
How arrogant and self-centered is that?
No respect whatsoever for the rights of others. Go find another sandbox if you don't like the rules in this one!
Toad
Trespassing? Definitely.
Deserved? Probably.
A weak excuse to beat a somewhat conservative Republican Administration and Law Enforcement Agency over the head with wrongheaded left-wing anarchist, anti-government, anti-establishment lawsuits? No question.
According to you anarchists, the lumber company should pay dearly for their "wrongdoing", and the law enforcement agencies should pay dearly for your "wrongdoing". You somehow have the right to simply take control of someone else's private property, but neither the owner nor law enforcement agencies have the right to force you to leave when you refuse?
How arrogant and self-centered is that?
No respect whatsoever for the rights of others. Go find another sandbox if you don't like the rules in this one!
Toad
Oh I get it. When Bush kills TENS OF THOUSANDS in Afganistan, you turn away. When Bush kills THOUSANDS more in Iraq, you don't notice. But, when a trespasser is forcibly removed, it's worthy of your time to complain about anyone complaining.
"You somehow have the right to simply take control of someone else's private property" - toad
Well let's see, PL has paid out over 10 million in property damages to adjacent landowners for landsliding and flooding. Where were you defending those landowners before they were harmed? Property rights for the corporations, not the community? Is that your logic? Would it be just to swab a chemical agent into John Campbell or Robert Manne's eyes? How about we swab into Chuckie's eyes for ripping off inocent peoples life savings and looting this community of its resources. The writing is on the wall, PL is on the verge of bankruptcy.
Sure, remove the trespassers, but they didn't need to use chemical agents. The cops were too lazy to drag them out. If that is resisting, let the court punish them, not the sheriff's department. Yes, the cops were lazy. What did they care, they get paid by the hour. Err, umm PL's sheriff's department. Remember, seperation of powers? The various branches of government are just that, different aspects of the government. I thought they called that democracy back in grade school, but we seem far from it these days. no bush wasn't elected, he was appointed. If trespassing was such a heinous crime, let the jury or judge decide that and punish accordingly, not by the use of torture. Yes, it was torture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Toad, by your logic, we'd still be segregated or at war in vietnam. Civil disobediance has a long history to it and maybe you ought to learn your history before you start spouting your mouth.
Oh by the way, don't believe on the flooding or excessive logging, please see:
http://indybay.org/news/2003/01/1564245.php
http://salmon-forever.org/elk_river_flood.htm
Well let's see, PL has paid out over 10 million in property damages to adjacent landowners for landsliding and flooding. Where were you defending those landowners before they were harmed? Property rights for the corporations, not the community? Is that your logic? Would it be just to swab a chemical agent into John Campbell or Robert Manne's eyes? How about we swab into Chuckie's eyes for ripping off inocent peoples life savings and looting this community of its resources. The writing is on the wall, PL is on the verge of bankruptcy.
Sure, remove the trespassers, but they didn't need to use chemical agents. The cops were too lazy to drag them out. If that is resisting, let the court punish them, not the sheriff's department. Yes, the cops were lazy. What did they care, they get paid by the hour. Err, umm PL's sheriff's department. Remember, seperation of powers? The various branches of government are just that, different aspects of the government. I thought they called that democracy back in grade school, but we seem far from it these days. no bush wasn't elected, he was appointed. If trespassing was such a heinous crime, let the jury or judge decide that and punish accordingly, not by the use of torture. Yes, it was torture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Toad, by your logic, we'd still be segregated or at war in vietnam. Civil disobediance has a long history to it and maybe you ought to learn your history before you start spouting your mouth.
Oh by the way, don't believe on the flooding or excessive logging, please see:
http://indybay.org/news/2003/01/1564245.php
http://salmon-forever.org/elk_river_flood.htm
pl continues to destroy the property stolen from indian tribes, and to steal ancient forests from future generations. someday when white supremacy is overcome, the homicide and genocide will be addressed in court and stolen property returned to it's rightful owners, just as victims of the nazi holocaust are today getting back some of what was stolen from them.
Couldnt the "torture" been avoided if those people simply left when asked? Who's fault is it? LOL
When a person uses the infliction of pain to get someone else to do something that he/she doesn't want to do, that is torture.
We have the right to protest, non-violently, to express our grievances with our government. We have the right to not be beaten, tortured, etc. There are international treaties regarding torture and human rights. We have to be on a level higher than brute force, violence, and war. These things are not part of a "civil society."
Why try to justify torture?
Just admit that it was wrong, and let yourself evolve and heal. The fact that you are still trying to justify it shows that you have not yet healed, and that you are still trying to hold on to old, out-dated, oppressive tactics.
It's like trying to justify the Nazi concentration camps and other war crimes...it just doesn't work.
I would say that apologies, on behalf of the Humboldt Co. Sheriff's Dept., are in order, as well as the abolition of pepper spray use on non-violent "offenders."
We must evolve into the Light...
We have the right to protest, non-violently, to express our grievances with our government. We have the right to not be beaten, tortured, etc. There are international treaties regarding torture and human rights. We have to be on a level higher than brute force, violence, and war. These things are not part of a "civil society."
Why try to justify torture?
Just admit that it was wrong, and let yourself evolve and heal. The fact that you are still trying to justify it shows that you have not yet healed, and that you are still trying to hold on to old, out-dated, oppressive tactics.
It's like trying to justify the Nazi concentration camps and other war crimes...it just doesn't work.
I would say that apologies, on behalf of the Humboldt Co. Sheriff's Dept., are in order, as well as the abolition of pepper spray use on non-violent "offenders."
We must evolve into the Light...
What do you mean it's not o.k. for big cops with guns to grab a little girl by the hair and force a pepper sprayed soak Q-tip into her Eye. She was tresspassing and had her hands and arms locked to her sides. I know, the big cops thought that force was needed, because the little girl was not obeying them. Why do you think it is called a protest demonstration? If we didn't resist, than you would think everything is o.k.! Please don't allow this type of torture to continue!
Okay...let's look at the facts:
1. You have the right to protest on public property or private property AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. I.e. the KKK can't legally protest by knocking down statues, but they can spout their stupid rhetoric in a peaceful manner.
2. Simply being on private land that isn't yours is a crime, whether you are protesting or not. There is no gray area. You own it, or you don't. When you are there without permission, it called trespassing.
3. Being asked to leave said area by a police officer and you not complying give the officer the right to arrest you for trespassing.
4. If you do not get up, it's called "Resisting Arrest." He then has the right to use non-violent means...pepper spray, CS gas, Al Sharpton's Face, or music from Yanni....to get you to move.
5. He can also use as much force as necessary to physically remove you.
Now, if I was committing a crime, and an officer asked me to leave, I said no, he insisted and told me I would be under arrest and I still said no, I would prefer the pepper spray to getting my head bashed in.
Don't be a retard. When the cop says go, you go or bad things happen to you.
1. You have the right to protest on public property or private property AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. I.e. the KKK can't legally protest by knocking down statues, but they can spout their stupid rhetoric in a peaceful manner.
2. Simply being on private land that isn't yours is a crime, whether you are protesting or not. There is no gray area. You own it, or you don't. When you are there without permission, it called trespassing.
3. Being asked to leave said area by a police officer and you not complying give the officer the right to arrest you for trespassing.
4. If you do not get up, it's called "Resisting Arrest." He then has the right to use non-violent means...pepper spray, CS gas, Al Sharpton's Face, or music from Yanni....to get you to move.
5. He can also use as much force as necessary to physically remove you.
Now, if I was committing a crime, and an officer asked me to leave, I said no, he insisted and told me I would be under arrest and I still said no, I would prefer the pepper spray to getting my head bashed in.
Don't be a retard. When the cop says go, you go or bad things happen to you.
Your stated opinion is a good example of a fascist point of view.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network